X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=tests%2Fcompiler.impure.lisp;h=a1e239b9c71891f9bb99c4fd42c5134d39b7c6e7;hb=ffe8d65266ed7c2c67a0a6ce7ff0de633000037e;hp=1025f37c41b72288f9839300dd9fd272d362eb7e;hpb=1a3569649605706f9ca6fde135ffb1c77b2246f4;p=sbcl.git

diff --git a/tests/compiler.impure.lisp b/tests/compiler.impure.lisp
index 1025f37..a1e239b 100644
--- a/tests/compiler.impure.lisp
+++ b/tests/compiler.impure.lisp
@@ -53,11 +53,47 @@
       (when (and (digs) (digs)) x))))
 
 ;;; Bug 132: The compiler used to fail to compile INTEGER-valued CATCH
-;;; tags. This was fixed by Alexey Dejneka in sbcl-0.7.1.14. (They're
-;;; still a bad idea because tags are compared with EQ, but now it's a
+;;; tags. This was fixed by Alexey Dejneka in sbcl-0.7.1.14. (INTEGER
+;;; catch tags are still a bad idea because EQ is used to compare
+;;; tags, and EQ comparison on INTEGERs is unportable; but now it's a
 ;;; compiler warning instead of a failure to compile.)
 (defun foo ()
   (catch 0 (print 1331)))
+
+;;; Bug 150: In sbcl-0.7.1.15, compiling this code caused a failure in
+;;; SB-C::ADD-TEST-CONSTRAINTS:
+;;;    The value NIL is not of type SB-C::CONTINUATION.
+;;; This bug was fixed by APD in sbcl-0.7.1.30.
+(defun bug150-test1 ()
+  (let* ()
+    (flet ((wufn () (glorp table1 4.9)))
+      (gleep *uustk* #'wufn "#1" (list)))
+    (if (eql (lo foomax 3.2))
+	(values)
+	(error "not ~S" '(eql (lo foomax 3.2))))
+    (values)))
+;;; A simpler test case for bug 150: The compiler died with the
+;;; same type error when trying to compile this.
+(defun bug150-test2 ()
+  (let ()
+    (<)))
+
+;;; bug 147, fixed by APD 2002-04-28
+;;;
+;;; This test case used to crash the compiler, e.g. with
+;;;   failed AVER: "(= (LENGTH (BLOCK-SUCC CALL-BLOCK)) 1)"
+(defun bug147 (string ind)
+  (flet ((digs ()
+           (let (old-index)
+	     (if (and (< ind ind)
+		      (typep (char string ind) '(member #\1)))
+		 nil))))))
+
+;;; bug reported and fixed by Matthias Hoelzl sbcl-devel 2002-05-13
+(defmacro foo-2002-05-13 () ''x)
+(eval '(foo-2002-05-13))
+(compile 'foo-2002-05-13)
+(foo-2002-05-13) ; (The bug caused UNDEFINED-FUNCTION to be signalled here.)
 
 ;;;; tests not in the problem domain, but of the consistency of the
 ;;;; compiler machinery itself